Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/372,092

Installation for Capturing Floods and Excess Water in Drainage Systems, As Well As Maintenance of Road Surfaces According to Warnings, Phenomena, and Weather Parameters Measured in Real Time

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Sep 23, 2023
Examiner
HARTMANN, GARY S
Art Unit
3671
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
903 granted / 1244 resolved
+20.6% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
1291
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.2%
+5.2% vs TC avg
§102
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
§112
23.2%
-16.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1244 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Information Disclosure Statement The non-patent literature abstracts in the information disclosure statement filed 23 September 2023 have been lined through because these are the proper English language materials required to consider the non-English foreign patent documents. Although the submissions have been lined through, these documents have been considered in conjunction with the foreign patent documents. Specification The disclosure is objected to because it lacks section headings, apart from the brief description of the drawings. Appropriate correction is required. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is a run-on type sentence in the form of a claim. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). The title of the invention is too long. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for general structural details, does not reasonably provide enablement for specific structural configurations and automated actions. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make or use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims. The structural details are largely listings of parts with no clearly recited arrangements thereof. The phrases “according to the set time,” (line 2) “according to the commands…” (lines 6-7), “based on” (line 11) and “when the sewage system cannot cope” (lines15-16) are not enabled, since there are insufficient details regarding “operating,” “controlled,” “allowing” and “absorbs,” respectively, subsequently recited actions in the claims and specification. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. Essentially every line has vague, narrative and indefinite recitations. Additionally, numerous recitations lack proper antecedent basis. Recitations of “it,” “its” and “which” must be replaced by positive recitations of specific elements, due to the equivocal nature of the terms. The recitation of “large” is a relative term and the subsequent “i.e. more than 3cm” is indefinite since it is unclear if this is to be a positively recited scope. The recitations of “means” are improper because they are not parts of a proper means plus function recitation; e.g., there is no means for electrical impulsing (last two lines of claim 1), rather there is simply an electrical impulse. These examples are minor examples compared to much larger narrative issues, some of which have been discussed in the 112(a) rejection above. These examples are not a comprehensive list of indefinite issues. The claims are so indefinite as to preclude examination on the merits. The lack of rejection based upon prior art is not an indication of allowable subject matter. This can only be determined based upon claims that positively point out and distinctly claim the invention. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARY S HARTMANN whose telephone number is (571)272-6989. The examiner can normally be reached 11-7:30. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher Sebesta can be reached at 571 272-0547. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. GARY S. HARTMANN Primary Examiner Art Unit 3671 /GARY S HARTMANN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 23, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601180
STAIRCASE WHEELCHAIR RAMP ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601127
IMPACT DISSIPATING BOLLARD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590426
CRAWLER BRIDGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590423
EDGE SLUMP CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584278
IMPACT ABSORBING POST
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+18.4%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1244 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month